Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Onslaught" data-source="post: 7857252" data-attributes="member: 61011">I can't believe there was such a rarsh feedack on those things. Actually, they were an evolution from what they published in the first UA, more in line with the setting, and I remember mostly positive feedback online when Wayfinders was released.Also, I don't get the "math".So... now we have new Sacred Cows in D&D 5e, I guess.Some of the changes are for the better though, when they just reference a spell that does what an ability was doing and point out differences.However, the bads outweight the good IMHO.Yes... one of the main complains about Changelling from UA was that the race was way weaker than other races. The revised version from Wayfinders kinda fixed that.They do. But now they kind suck in combat tier.I wasn't aware, thanks for sharing!That's sad. I think they sorted that out well in various Sage Advices and Twitter. Integrated Protection really doesn't work well with Magic Armor... but shouldn't be that hard to write a way to improve IP magically, in a way similar to Docents. That's why I call it bad game design.I use D&D Beyond in my campaigns, both as a player and as DM.There I won't have this option, because the great UA Warforged is going to be substituted by the bad one from Rise.Plus changes in Dragonmarks... I somehow feel they got more stuff than they should with expanded spell list, don't know how that affects the game ballance. I think that wasn't even tested.Also, lore wise, Dragonmarks should be focused in daily stuff and not combat stuff (like Hunter's Mark), so powers should improve the character's abilities in Exploration and Socialization.</blockquote>

Verification